Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Liberals are expected to appoint 20 new senators within weeks

Toronto Star

Liberals are expected to appoint 20 new senators within weeks

Justin Trudeau’s independent Senate gamble will be put to the test once independent senators outnumber Conservatives and Liberals.
OTTAWA—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to name 20 new “non-affiliated” or “independent” senators in a matter of weeks.

The government had pledged to fill the remaining Senate vacancies, including six for Ontario, by the end of the year. But a source familiar with the process said the Liberals want to move quickly to fill those 20 seats.

The move would mean that, for the first time in the Senate’s history, non-affiliated senators will outnumber their Conservative or Independent Liberal counterparts with a plurality of seats. And it will also put to the test Trudeau’s gamble to make the upper chamber more respectable in the eyes of Canadians.


Peter Harder, the Liberal government’s representative in the Senate, expects recommendations from an arm’s-length advisory board on Senate appointments to land on the prime minister’s desk within weeks.


“I think the new senators will give an added impetus of change or reform and renewal to the institution,” Harder said in an interview Monday.

 
“This is a change in progress. The modernization of this institution to make it an independent, non-partisan, accountable, transparent and complimentary body is a work in progress. And we’re looking for opportunities to work with all senators to achieve that objective.”


Against the backdrop of the Senate expense scandal in January 2014, Trudeau, then in opposition, announced that Liberal senators would no longer be welcome to caucus with their House of Commons colleagues.


After the Liberals took power two years later, Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef put in place a new arm’s-length system to appoint senators, rather than picking from the usual ranks of party stalwarts, fundraisers, and friendly journalists or lawyers.

 
In March, Trudeau appointed seven new senators, including Harder, former provincial NDP cabinet minister Frances Lankin, and Ratna Omidvar representing Ontario.


With the new batch of senators appointed, Trudeau will have appointed 27 to the upper chamber in his first year in power. Former prime minister Stephen Harper appointed 59 over almost a decade in power, but that number was kept low by Harper’s steadfast refusal to appoint new senators while the expense scandal embroiled his government.


Conservative Senator Leo Housakos, a former Senate Speaker and chair of the chamber’s powerful internal economy committee, said that he’s heard the new appointments will be made “imminently.”
Housakos, a critic of the Liberals’ Senate proposal, said the new dynamic in the upper chamber will make the operations of that place more difficult.


“The difficulty, and they’re starting to recognize it themselves, is that it’s hard to operate in the British parliamentary system without clusters and caucuses,” Housakos said in an interview Tuesday.
“A lot of the decision (about) who sits on (Senate) committees are taken by caucuses, are taken by collectively within groups of like-minded senators.

So when someone says that a senator is independent, do you think that Justin Trudeau is going to be appointing to the Senate right-of-centre politically minded people? Or do you think there’s a great likelihood that, like the last batch, he will be appointing left-of-centre, social liberal-minded individuals?”


The Star requested comment from the Prime Minister’s Office for this article, asking whether Trudeau has made his selections or when those decisions will be made. In response, the Privy Council Office — public servants who support the prime minister — suggested the final decisions had not yet been made.


“The process being led by the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments is ongoing,” PCO spokesperson Raymond Rivet wrote in a statement.

“The government has indicated that it intends to fill the current Senate vacancies by the end of 2016.”

 

Friday, January 1, 2016

Senate Reform Essential Reading and Communication Job Applicatioon


The Senate – An Essential House of Parliament

 http://www.revparl.ca/37/1/37n1e_14_kinsella.pdf


Also
 Why is the Senate of Canada so essential?
   https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-senate-canada-so-essential-alexis-david-fafard




Work at the Senate

Various positions in Communication          

Purpose

To establish a pool of candidates for various positions in the Communications Directorate in order to staff these positions on an indeterminate, determinate, acting, or assignment basis. The positions to staff are:

Chief, Outreach & Committees Liaison ($85,476 - $108,153)
Chief, Writer & Media Outreach ($78,129 - $98,859)
*Stakeholders Outreach Officer ($68,507 - $86,680) *
Committees Liaison Officer (Communications)($68,507 - $86,680)
Digital Content Producer ($61,676 - $78,040)
Social Media Coordinator ($55,672 - $70,443)
Senate Events Coordinator ($55,672 - $70,443)
Media Outreach Coordinator ($55,672 - $70,443)
Communications Assistant ($49,877 - $63,112)
Press Secretary ($68,507 - $86,680)

Read More https://jobs-emplois.sen.parl.gc.ca/cl4/xweb/XWeb.asp?tbtoken=YVtYQRNcR1U4ZHYCRyMhFVFUd2VbBkxYcSZYTlB9f2xFKzduWzESdxR2dEQjGVtQSHBkXTpT&chk=dFlbQBJQ&page=jobdetails&JobId=J1215-0291&BRID=21596&lang=1

MySenateReformBlog Archive 2014-15

My Senate ReformBlog Archive 2014-15

Blog Archive

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Liberal plan to pick 'non-partisan' senators draws quick criticism B.C. Premier Christy Clark slams reforms; NDP calls plan an 'inadequate fix'

Liberal plan to pick 'non-partisan' senators draws quick criticism

B.C. Premier Christy Clark slams reforms; NDP calls plan an 'inadequate fix'

 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-advisory-board-non-partisan-leblanc-monsef-1.3348531
 
By Kathleen Harris, CBC News Posted: Dec 03, 2015 8:35 AM ET Last Updated: Dec 03, 2015 8:05 PM ET
                    
Media placeholder
    
Monsef on new way to appoint Senators 0:57
Close
Media placeholder   
New Senate appointment process 10:11
The Liberal government is overhauling the Senate appointment process in a bid to end bitter partisanship and restore public confidence in the scandal-plagued Senate, but the plan is already under fire.

Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef and House leader Dominic LeBlanc today announced a five-member independent advisory board will be struck to make recommendations for "merit-based" candidates to sit in the Senate.
During a news conference on Parliament Hill, Monsef said the changes will not require any constitutional revisions and will ensure regional, gender and ethnic representation in the Senate. The advisory board will be formed this month and will consult with provinces, community and indigenous groups, business and labour organizations, arts councils and others.

"It brings real change to the Senate for the first time in decades," she said.

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark was one of the first to criticize the proposed changes, announcing on Twitter that her province won't participate in the process.

"Today's changes don't address our concerns — Senate has never represented B.C.'s interests at the national level," she tweeted.

The Speech From The Throne 2015 http://sen.parl.gc.ca/portal/infographics/SenCA-infographic-SFT-e.htm

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

UPDATED ('We're just not going to make the appointments,) Is a totally irresponsible statement coming from Stephen Harper's mouth, ( the Prime Minister SHALL appoint) BNA act.

Update: Not appointing Senators to Fill the Red Chamber before he goes is a disgrace and will be Harper's Legacy ..

It is totally irresponsible  NOT to appoint NOW ....

Leaving newly minted PM Trudeau fill the Red Chambers is a great dis service to Canada and to the Senate and will make Harper the Laugh stock on Canadian historians .....

WE (CANADA) need a strong Senate Now more than ever and Harper gives it a PASS .... by the way its not the first time Harper leaves us down .. 

History will judge Harper harshly ...

  read again

We're just not going to make the appointments, (SENATE REFORM 2015-2115 NOT!) 

FIX IT! By APPOINTING: People with a set agenda and job description. IT CAN WORK Its also indispensable                                               348

also here
'We're just not going to make the appointments,(SENATE REFORM 2015-2115 NOT!) FIX IT! By APPOINTING: People with a set agenda and job description. IT CAN WORK Its also indispensable

Bloggers note: ('We're just not going to make the appointments,)
Is a totally irresponsible statement coming from Stephen Harper's mouth, ( the Prime Minister SHALL appoint)  BNA act.        1206


official link
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stephen-harper-vows-not-to-name-any-senators-before-reforms-made-1.3167112

Stephen Harper vows not to name any senators before reforms made

'We're just not going to make the appointments,' Harper says as 22 seats sit vacant

By Laura Payton, CBC News Posted: Jul 24, 2015 4:28 PM ET Last Updated: Jul 24, 2015 10:39 PM

Related Stories


Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he refuses to name any senators until the Senate is reformed, adding he hopes it will put pressure on the provinces to figure out a plan to update the institution.

Twenty-two of the Senate's 105 seats are currently vacant. 
"Canadians are not divided on their opposition to the status quo — that is to an unelected, unaccountable Senate," Harper said Friday.
"The government is not going to take any actions going forward that would do anything to further entrench that unelected, unaccountable Senate."

But while Harper said his intention is to "formalize" the moratorium on new appointments, he later said that it's not possible under the Constitution.

"We'll entrench it simply in this way, which is we're just not going to make the appointments."

"I can't formalize a non-appointment. That would be a constitutional change. But under the Constitution of the day, the prime minister has the authority to appoint or not appoint," Harper said.

Harper said the benefit is that costs are down $6 million with 22 seats now unfilled: about one fifth of the 105-seat chamber. He said the provinces have so far been "resistant" to reform.

The policy will remain in place as long as the government can pass its legislation, the prime minister said.

"It will force the provinces over time — who as you know have been resistant to any reforms, in most cases — to either come up with a plan of comprehensive reform or to conclude that the only way to deal with the status quo is abolition."

Last year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Senate reform would require consent from seven provinces representing half the population. Abolishing the Senate would call for the consent of all provinces, the top court said.

It's been roughly 2½ years since Harper last appointed a senator, and the question of whether he can choose not to fill the vacant seats is already being challenged in court.

Vancouver lawyer Aniz Alani launched a court challenge arguing Harper has a constitutional obligation to fill vacant seats since the provinces are under-represented. In May, a Federal Court justice threw out the government's application to dismiss the case.
"If he takes the position that it's up to him to make the appointments and he simply refuses to do so, I don't see any other way of enforcing the Constitution other than to get a declaration from the courts that it's a duty he has," Alani told CBC's Rosemary Barton on Power & Politics after Harper's announcement.

32 will have to retire by 2020

Of the 22 existing vacancies, 15 belong to Ontario and Quebec. The two provinces combined are allotted 48 seats, something that has long frustrated westerners, with British Columbia and Alberta getting only six seats each.
Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, seen with Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, says he's not going to appoint any new senators. Wall says it will be up to premiers to 'respond to this' now. (Mark Taylor/Canadian Press )
The Conservatives have 47 Senate seats, more than half of those that are filled. The Liberals have 29, with seven senators sitting as independents.

Another 32 senators will have to retire at age 75 between now and 2020.

Assuming a large number of senators don't quit the Senate or retire early, it would be years before any province was left without representation, and even longer before the Senate was left without enough members to pass legislation.

Harper has long struggled with the Senate on a number of fronts: as a Reform Party MP, he argued against having an unelected Senate.

As prime minister in 2008, faced with the possibility of being unseated by a Liberal-NDP coalition, he named 18 new senators, including three whose expenses have since been investigated by the RCMP (two face criminal charges resulting from those probes).
Over the next three years, he named 39 more. But since the Senate scandal broke, Harper has avoided naming anyone new to fill the growing number of vacancies.

'Trying to distract'

The New Democrats also want to see the Senate abolished, while the Liberals have proposed creating a non-partisan process for advising the prime minister on appointments.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, who last winter released the Liberals' Senate caucus, said Friday that Harper "has made this promise before.

"He broke that promise 59 times," Trudeau said. "Mr. Harper is trying to distract people from his inability to deal with the economy, and we don't believe him."

Trudeau reacts to Harper's Senate appointment see official link above
NDP Leader Tom Mulcair said even though his party has no representation in the Senate, he would not make any appointments while negotiating with provinces to abolish the chamber.
Harper said he doesn't think Canadians will notice if the Senate fades away.

"The number of vacancies will continue to rise and other than some voices in the Senate and some people who want to be appointed to the Senate, no one will complain."

Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall, who appeared with the prime minister on Friday and favours abolition, said he fully supports the prime minister's move.

"It will be up to premiers ... to respond to this now," he said.
The premier's office in P.E.I. released their own statement Friday, reiterating their opposition to abolition.

"The Senate contributes regional balance and voice in our national institutions," Wade MacLauchlan's office said.

Carissima Mathen, an associate law professor at the University of Ottawa, said she thinks the prime minister's move could do damage to federal-provincial relations.

"There's a very essential constitutional principle that you can't do by indirect means what the Constitution prohibits you from doing by direct means," Mathen said Friday on Power & Politics. 

"The Supreme Court has said that the prime minister does not have the unilateral authority to reshape the Senate even in ways that he might in good faith think are really warranted and legitimate."

Saturday, October 17, 2015

Conrad Black: Stephen Harper did many great things for this country, but he hung on to power a little too long

Bloggers Note:
Black wrote about the Senate, I agree completely with the last phrase. (The real answer is to name distinguished senators, even if they only undertake to serve for a few years.) SEE MY BLOG ('We're just not going to make the appointments,) Is a totally irresponsible statement coming from Stephen Harper's mouth, ( the Prime Minister SHALL appoint) BNA act. http://thehighchamber.blogspot.ca/…/were-just-not-going-to-…
>>>>> back to the article >>> "Harper claimed the Supreme Court made constitutional change impossible when it determined, as any imbecile knew it would, that the House of Commons could not simply abolish the Senate. His response to the questions surrounding the Senate is not to name any new senators — almost a quarter of its seats are now vacant. The real answer is to name distinguished senators, even if they only undertake to serve for a few years." my Prediction Harper 176. Libs 115. NDP 42 and Harper gone within 2 years Sept 5, 2017.

-----------------------------------------------------

Conrad Black: Stephen Harper did many great things for this country, but he hung on to power a little too long

 http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-stephen-harper-did-many-great-things-for-this-country-but-he-hung-on-to-power-a-little-too-long

It was, until fairly recently, a good government, but it has not renewed its personnel or its program and has become frightening in its disregard for democratic institutions and the rights of its citizens.
MORRIS LAMONT / THE LONDON FREE PRESS It was, until fairly recently, a good government, but it has not renewed its personnel or its program and has become frightening in its disregard for democratic institutions and the rights of its citizens.
 
The arguments for voting for Conservative Leader Stephen Harper are numerous and persuasive. He has been a competent and diligent prime minister who has avoided fiscal imprudence, brought us well through the 2008 financial crisis and has gone to great and imaginative lengths to keep taxes down and shrink public-sector spending as a share of GDP.

His government has cleaned up a mess in immigration, has been creative with native peoples’ questions without signing on to the nationally self-administered blood libel of “cultural genocide” and shown good judgment and restraint in not going into the deep end over unproved ecological alarm. (It was a credit to him that our peppy itinerant Marxist, Naomi Klein denounced Harper last week in the world-renowned Sydney Opera House as a “climate criminal.”)
Harper has shed the cozy myth that we are a nation of beloved peacemakers
His foreign policy has been robust in joining the coalition against ISIL, in not appeasing Russian aggression and in unambiguously recognizing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. 

(The Palestinians could have their state next week if they abandoned their claimed right to inundate Israel with millions of returning Palestinians. The right of Palestinians to return must be to Palestine, not Israel.) He has neither antagonized the United States as former prime ministers John Diefenbaker and Pierre Trudeau did, nor been subservient to it.

He has shed the cozy myth that we are a nation of beloved peacemakers enlightening the rabidly anti-Israel and anti-West blocs in the United Nations: it is a badge of honour that Canada has not been patronized by those corrupt despotisms that have hijacked much of the UN apparatus. Harper has earned our gratitude by banishing from our foreign policy what the distinguished American (and half-Canadian) secretary of state Dean Acheson accused us of 65 years ago: “arm-flapping moralism.”

As I wrote in my history of Canada (Rise to Greatness) last year, Harper ranks now with Louis St. Laurent, Lester Pearson and Brian Mulroney as an important prime minister, just one level below John A. Macdonald, Wilfrid Laurier, William Lyon Mackenzie King and Pierre Trudeau. He had to put two quarrelling parties together to become a challenger for that office, and he led his reunified party to steadily better results in four straight elections up to 2011. (No other democratic leader has done this — not even Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was elected U.S. president four times, but not with increasing pluralities.)
These are remarkable achievements, and it was an honour to have been of some assistance to him in the earlier stages of his progress. It was partly to help reunite the Conservatives and promote an alternative to what had almost been one-party Liberal rule for a century (73 of the 103 previous years) that Ken Whyte and I founded the National Post in 1999, and I tangibly supported Harper as head of the National Citizens’ Coalition, the Canadian Alliance and the reunified Conservatives for many years.

On the other side of the ledger as we approach this election, his government has, with a parliamentary majority, become sclerotically rigid, media-inaccessible, authoritarian and peevish. Strong ministers such as John Baird and the late Jim Flaherty have not been properly replaced, and there is no discernible policy goal or imagination: only the relentless pursuit of extended incumbency. It is a humourless and often paranoid regime where all spontaneity in cabinet or in the governing caucus in Parliament is stifled and punished.

Harper regularly forbids colleagues from being in contact with people of whom he capriciously disapproves. He will not allow Canada, unlike most serious countries, to have a completely non-partisan, individually conscientious, legislative debate about abortion — essentially the issue of when the rights of the unborn start to rival those of the mother — because it is divisive. He will not respond to Quebec’s desire to try to complete the constitutional reforms of Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney, because that, too, is not an easily manageable issue. Leaders are not elected to deal only with what is easy.

Harper claimed the Supreme Court made constitutional change impossible when it determined, as any imbecile knew it would, that the House of Commons could not simply abolish the Senate. His response to the questions surrounding the Senate is not to name any new senators — almost a quarter of its seats are now vacant. The real answer is to name distinguished senators, even if they only undertake to serve for a few years.

While the prime minister’s foreign policy is principled and rigorous, he has allowed our military capabilities to atrophy to the point that we are the mouse that roars. No one, except Israel, which can take care of itself and is grateful for verbal support, pays any attention to us, especially not Russian President Vladimir Putin. If Putin were to test our Arctic sovereignty, we would only have native people in kayaks to defend it.

Harper has gagged Parliament (and probably misled it in the Mike Duffy affair), and garrotted his own cabinet and caucus, but has sat as silent and inert as a suet pudding while the courts of the country, incited by the jurisdictionally putschist chief justice, Beverley McLachlin, have steadily assumed the rights of the federal and provincial legislatures under the authority of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Pierre Trudeau promoted the charter as an antidote to endless dispute over the federal-provincial division of powers, not as a matrix for the emasculation of legislators.

Instead of counter-legislating, or invalidating ultra vires decisions (of which there have been many) by invoking the notwithstanding clause, Harper assailed the chief justice’s personal integrity, almost the only relevant area where she is invulnerable. He has appointed most of the incumbent Supreme Court justices, and a great many judges on junior federal courts, and has only himself to blame for this jurisdictional chaos. The supreme democratic authority of Parliament is being squandered by a control-addicted prime minister and by the falsely righteous depredations and tinkerings of an unchallenged and usurpatory bench.

The entire reactionary agenda is obnoxious to traditional Canadian respect for rights and due process. The omnibus crime bill imposed arbitrary and draconian sentences (Parliament’s one counter-attack on the rapacious judiciary). It built more prisons in response to a declining crime rate, reduced rehabilitative activity and inmate access to families, and is in sum an unrelievedly retrograde, total-immersion plunge into primitivism. Native people will be the chief occupants of the new prisons, which should be repurposed at once as assisted housing. The bill is a disgrace and should be repealed, even by this government if it is re-elected.

Bill C-51 in defence of national security from terrorism has unexceptionable objectives, but dispenses with due process and cannot fail to be abused in a way profoundly offensive to Canadian traditions of respect for individual rights and the rule of law. The leaders of the NDP and the Green party, Thomas Mulcair and Elizabeth May, were magnificent in their opposition, and even Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau’s call for greater oversight was reassuring.

The gratuitously self-awarded right to expel dual citizens convicted of terrorist acts from Canadian citizenship, is another worrisome step toward un-Canadian, if not totalitarian, measures. We can punish our own citizens without expelling them. Trudeau’s objections to this mob-pleaser were also impressive.

Finally, to make a major election issue out of a woman wearing a face-covering niqab at a citizenship swearing-in ceremony after privately identifying herself is a shabby act of desperation. (Public security requires that everyone be identifiable when in public, but in particular ceremonies, exceptions can be made for religious reasons as long as the individuals privately prove their identity to officials.) 

 There is no reason for the government to do any of this except pandering to knuckle-dragging authoritarians, in no danger of straying toward the Liberals or NDP. It all incites worried curiosity about what cloven-footed, horned and furry–headed motivational beasts may lurk within Harper’s mind.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Patrick Doyle
THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Patrick DoyleZunera Ishaq talks to reporters outside the Federal Court of Appeal in Ottawa on Tuesday, September 15, 2015. A new court ruling means Ishaq, who chooses to cover her face, now has a chance to become a Canadian and vote in the Oct. 19 federal election.
 
It was, until fairly recently, a good government, but it has not renewed its personnel or its program and has become frightening in its disregard for democratic institutions and the rights of the citizens to whom it must answer and is sworn to serve.
Mulcair has fought an admirable campaign as leader of the opposition. He is not an extremist. But the NDP favours abstention from military action against ISIL, recourse to the eco-lunacy of Kyoto and cap-and-trade, unsustainable increases in public spending and taxes, the effective abolition of the English language in the federal workplace in Quebec, repeal of the Clarity Act and a direct pitch to Quebec’s defeated separatists (though Mulcair’s stance on the niqab has been admirable). The NDP can only do limited damage in a provincial government; if elected federally, well-intentioned to the end, it would take this country over Niagara Falls.

Justin Trudeau took the headship of a shattered Liberal party that was widely assumed to be beyond recovery. He has been flexible on public finance, principled on the issue of expulsion from citizenship, wants to fund the armed forces and has stepped with self-possession into a daunting role opposite more experienced adversaries at the head of bigger parliamentary parties. He remains a largely unknown quantity, but he has a very alluring personality, a quick intelligence and an apparently reasonable combination of principle and openness. (He also has his lapses, as in his tasteless and nasty attack on popular former Toronto mayor and recovering cancer patient Rob Ford.)

I wrote here earlier this year that the Conservatives’ best chance of re-election was for Harper to follow the example of King, Pearson and Pierre Trudeau, and hand over the leadership of his government to his partisans’ choice as a successor; and I wrote that the Conservatives would make a serious mistake if they assumed that Justin Trudeau would make an air-headed ass of himself in an election campaign. Trudeau and Mulcair are right, given Harper’s now almost sociopathic personality, to say that they will support each other rather than a Harper minority.

Needlessly, Harper is now likely to follow the route of greater statesmen who didn’t know when to leave: Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer, Charles de Gaulle, Margaret Thatcher, Helmut Kohl. He was a good prime minister, but it is time to see him off. Trudeau, with a minority, will grow or go. I believe the former, but he has earned his chance. We really cannot have another four years of government by a sadistic Victorian schoolmaster.

National Post